CORRESPONDENCE 441 



showing that Mind apart from Body may sometimes be or become apparent to 

 our living senses. 



Dr. Mercier's little book suggested that the observations under C do not really 

 confirm B because they may be explained by the ordinary methods of common 

 sense as being due merely to deception or legerdemain. My review of his book 

 suggested in addition, (i) that the case under A is so strong and the case under 

 B so weak that the evidence under C requires the most rigorous analysis before 

 it is accepted ; and (2) that the fact that B and C originated in the natural fear 

 of death, and are, therefore, agreeable to the mass of mankind, is an additional 

 reason why we should hesitate in accepting the speculations which they attempt 

 to support. 



Regarding C, the majority of people reject the alleged manifestations for the 

 following sufficient reasons. Most countries contain certain persons, who, by 

 practice and instruction, are able to perform a number of clever tricks, commonly 

 called conjuring or juggling. These are performed by sleight of hand, distraction 

 of attention, previous preparation of the room, collusion of members of the audience, 

 and other artifices. The conjurers are usually (except in card-sharping and 

 thimblerig), quite honest persons, who play the tricks to amuse themselves and 

 their friends or in order to make a living, but who openly repudiate supernatural 

 assistance. Most of us can do some of the simple tricks ourselves for the sake 

 of pleasing children, and so on ; but the more wonderful exhibitions given by 

 professional conjurors are almost always so clever that the most astute onlooker 

 fails to detect where the deception lies, even after frequent attempts to do so. 

 Now the spiritualistic exhibitions are of just the same class, being held in prepared 

 and darkened rooms, with all the modern resources of science to assist, before 

 audiences always capable of collusion and often desiring untruth rather than 

 truth (for the reason given above). The only difference is that the juggler now 

 calls himself or herself a medium, and pretends that his or her tricks are done by 

 supernatural agencies. To this claim the man of ordinary common sense replies, 

 " I do not know in the least how your tricks are done ; but they are not a whit more 

 wonderful than those of a conjurer ; and I therefore see no reason for believing 

 that you have used any but the natural agencies which he employs. Also, I find 

 it easier to think that you are an impostor than to agree that you can at will 

 summon supernatural potencies with which I, personally, have never had any 

 acquaintance." And the man of science adds, " The admission of your claim 

 involves the abandonment of all the conclusions obtained under A. Not only, 

 then, can 1 find no reasons for admitting your claim, but I do find a vast number 

 of reasons against doing so." 



To this the spiritualist always replies, " The manifestations of the conjurer and 

 the medium may be of the same class, but this does not necessarily prove that 

 they are always produced by the same agencies. I will admit that some 

 manifestations of some mediums have, sadly enough, sometimes been shown to 

 have been done by trickery ; but this dees not prove that all the manifestations 

 of all mediums are always due to trickery. You must therefore admit that some 

 of the manifestations are genuine." Now, this is a glaring example of the sit- 

 ergo-est fallacy — it may be, therefore it is. We cannot prove that all the 

 manifestations are not genuine ; therefore some of them are genuine : ergo, spirits 

 exist. We cannot prove that there are no elephants in the moon ! But, of course, 

 there is an infinity of possibilities between may be and is. 



The extent to which this sophistry is used by spiritualists is astonishing. Thus, 

 they talk of " bad seances" and "good seances" — namely, those which are, and 



29 



